Fledermaus Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 For some time there has been a cache in my area containing ONLY a "CODE WORD"(which the finder must send to the cache owner). This cache also does not have a logbook in it. A friend of mine once had a cache of this type and was told by a Reviewer(in accordance with new guideline at that time) that all caches must have logbooks in them. I remember GC once allowed this sort of cache, but I also remember the guidelines being changed. Can anyone tell me the official date GC changed the guidelines for this type of cache? Then I can compare that date to the cache publication date. If it was published before GC changed it's guidelines, should this older cache now have a logbook in it? If afterwards, the cache must have a logbook in it, right? Last question! Should I or anyone else really care? Quote Link to comment
+Team GeoBlast Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 For some time there has been a cache in my area containing ONLY a "CODE WORD"(which the finder must send to the cache owner). This cache also does not have a logbook in it. A friend of mine once had a cache of this type and was told by a Reviewer(in accordance with new guideline at that time) that all caches must have logbooks in them. I remember GC once allowed this sort of cache, but I also remember the guidelines being changed. Can anyone tell me the official date GC changed the guidelines for this type of cache? Then I can compare that date to the cache publication date. If it was published before GC changed it's guidelines, should this older cache now have a logbook in it? If afterwards, the cache must have a logbook in it, right? Last question! Should I or anyone else really care? No. Quote Link to comment
jholly Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 For some time there has been a cache in my area containing ONLY a "CODE WORD"(which the finder must send to the cache owner). This cache also does not have a logbook in it. A friend of mine once had a cache of this type and was told by a Reviewer(in accordance with new guideline at that time) that all caches must have logbooks in them. I remember GC once allowed this sort of cache, but I also remember the guidelines being changed. Can anyone tell me the official date GC changed the guidelines for this type of cache? Then I can compare that date to the cache publication date. If it was published before GC changed it's guidelines, should this older cache now have a logbook in it? If afterwards, the cache must have a logbook in it, right? Last question! Should I or anyone else really care? Could you tell me which one it is so I don't waste my time on it? Otherwise I don't care. Jim Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Last question! Should I or anyone else really care? No Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 (edited) For some time there has been a cache in my area containing ONLY a "CODE WORD"(which the finder must send to the cache owner). This cache also does not have a logbook in it. A friend of mine once had a cache of this type and was told by a Reviewer(in accordance with new guideline at that time) that all caches must have logbooks in them. I remember GC once allowed this sort of cache, but I also remember the guidelines being changed. Can anyone tell me the official date GC changed the guidelines for this type of cache? Then I can compare that date to the cache publication date. If it was published before GC changed it's guidelines, should this older cache now have a logbook in it? If afterwards, the cache must have a logbook in it, right? Last question! Should I or anyone else really care? Naw, this is something to not care about, even if it turns out it was published after the change. Unless you really dislike the cache owner (Just kidding. ) There is a website at http://archive.org (the wayback machine) where you can look up old screenshots of what a website looked like on a certain date years ago, if you're really interested; the web page with the guidelines in this case. Or maybe a reviewer with a good memory will chime in. Edited August 31, 2008 by TheWhiteUrkel Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Do it, or don't do it, as dictated by your own personal preference. Should you care? That's entirely up to you. Do I? Not at all. Quote Link to comment
+Snoogans Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 (edited) The cache police, they live inside of my head. The cache police, they come to me in my bed. The cache police, they're coming to arrest me, oh no. You know that talk is cheap, and those rumors ain't nice. And when I fall asleep I don't think I'll survive the night, the night. cause they're waiting for me. They're looking for me. Every single night they're driving me insane. Those men inside my brain. The cache police, they live inside of my head. (live inside of my head.) The cache police, they come to me in my bed. (come to me in my bed.) The cache police, they're coming to arrest me, oh no. Well, I can't tell lies, cause they're listening to me. And when I fall asleep, bet they're spying on me tonight, tonight. cause they're waiting for me. They're looking for me. Every single night they're driving me insane. Those men inside my brain. I try to sleep, they're wide awake, they won't leave me alone. They don't get paid to take vacations, or let me alone. They spy on me, I try to hide, they won't let me alone. They persecute me, theyre the judge and jury all in one. cause they're waiting for me. They're looking for me. Every single night they're driving me insane. Those men inside my brain. The cache police, they live inside of my head. The cache police, they come to me in my bed. The cache police, they're coming to arrest me. Edited August 31, 2008 by Snoogans Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Ya know Wink (and I know this to be your true identity), the guy was just asking if anyone thought it was appropriate, and it seems quite unamimous against it. No need for re-working horrible Cheap Trick songs. Quote Link to comment
+TrailGators Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 (edited) The cache police, they live inside of my head.The cache police, they come to me in my bed. The cache police, they're coming to arrest me, oh no. You know that talk is cheap, and those rumors ain't nice. And when I fall asleep I don't think I'll survive the night, the night. cause they're waiting for me. They're looking for me. Every single night they're driving me insane. Those men inside my brain. The cache police, they live inside of my head. (live inside of my head.) The cache police, they come to me in my bed. (come to me in my bed.) The cache police, they're coming to arrest me, oh no. Well, I can't tell lies, cause theyre listening to me. And when I fall asleep, bet they're spying on me tonight, tonight. cause they're waiting for me. They're looking for me. Every single night they're driving me insane. Those men inside my brain. I try to sleep, theyre wide awake, they won't leave me alone. They don't get paid to take vacations, or let me alone. They spy on me, I try to hide, they won't let me alone. They persecute me, theyre the judge and jury all in one. cause they're waiting for me. They're looking for me. Every single night they're driving me insane. Those men inside my brain. The cache police, they live inside of my head. The cache police, they come to me in my bed. The cache police, theyre coming to arrest me. ...by Cheap Cache... Edited August 31, 2008 by TrailGators Quote Link to comment
+Snoogans Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Ya know Wink (and I know this to be your true identity), (snip) No need for re-working horrible Cheap Trick songs. Don't be downing Cheap Trick sonny boy. Quote Link to comment
+Team GPSaxophone Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 For some time there has been a cache in my area containing ONLY a "CODE WORD"(which the finder must send to the cache owner). This cache also does not have a logbook in it. A friend of mine once had a cache of this type and was told by a Reviewer(in accordance with new guideline at that time) that all caches must have logbooks in them. I remember GC once allowed this sort of cache, but I also remember the guidelines being changed. Can anyone tell me the official date GC changed the guidelines for this type of cache? Then I can compare that date to the cache publication date. If it was published before GC changed it's guidelines, should this older cache now have a logbook in it? If afterwards, the cache must have a logbook in it, right? Last question! Should I or anyone else really care? The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind er, I mean, in the guidelines (emphasis added)... If a cache has been published and violates any guidelines listed below, you are encouraged to report it. However, if the cache was placed prior to the date when a guideline was issued or updated the cache is likely to be "grandfathered" and allowed to stand as is. Quote Link to comment
+CCrew Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Better question.... Who cares? Quote Link to comment
+Team GPSaxophone Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Better question.... Who cares? A codeword cache is little more than a virtual - you don't really even need to hide anything, just have someone answer a question related to the location. Since no one else can get a virtual published, why let this one through? Doesn't seem fair to those that like virtuals and to those looking for an actual geocache. Quote Link to comment
+Vinny & Sue Team Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Better question.... Who cares? A codeword cache is little more than a virtual - you don't really even need to hide anything, just have someone answer a question related to the location. Since no one else can get a virtual published, why let this one through? Doesn't seem fair to those that like virtuals and to those looking for an actual geocache. I suspect that the plethora of "no" and "who cares" replies from a number of posters to this thread may lie in the fact that they suspect that it is very likely that this is a grandfathered logbook-less cache, that is, one dating back to a date prior to the publication of the logbook rule, and the "ho hum" response may also due in part to the fact that some forum posters may remember the other recent thread started by the OP, wherein he appeared to have attempted to create a polarity between PMs and non-paying members, and thus some may be dismissing his inquiry as one more attempt to rock the boat for the sake of a bit of drama. Quote Link to comment
Chumpo Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 I'd hit it. I definitely would NOT hit it. Just look at those sharp knees. She is way below my standards. Quote Link to comment
Mag Magician Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 and thus some may be dismissing his inquiry as one more attempt to rock the boat for the sake of a bit of drama. Hmm, is that why my spidey.....er-r-r-r..........geosense caused me to not reply in this thread? Oops, just to be on topic...........Who cares? Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Ya know Wink (and I know this to be your true identity), (snip) No need for re-working horrible Cheap Trick songs. Don't be downing Cheap Trick sonny boy. I seem to remember the Dream Police album being dissed by fans and critics alike when it was new. That was a long time ago though. I'll just stick to dissing Rush. Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 I'll just stick to dissing Rush. A while back, I was telling my Mom about a Rush CD I had purchased. She gave me a look of disgust, asking, "You listen to Limbaugh?" Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.